This is a repository copy of After Dark: Channel 4’s innovation in television talk. White Rose Research Online URL for this paper: http://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/106636/ Version: Accepted Version Article: Lee, DJ orcid.org/0000-0002-9186-2401 and Corner, J (2017) After Dark: Channel 4’s innovation in television talk. Journal of British Cinema and Television, 14 (4). pp. 445-463. ISSN 1743-4521 https://doi.org/10.3366/jbctv.2017.0388 © 2017, Edinburgh University Press. This is an Accepted Manuscript of an article published by Edinburgh University Press in Journal of British Cinema and Television. The Version of Record is available online at: http://www.euppublishing.com/doi/abs/10.3366/jbctv.2017.0388 Reuse Unless indicated otherwise, fulltext items are protected by copyright with all rights reserved. The copyright exception in section 29 of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 allows the making of a single copy solely for the purpose of non-commercial research or private study within the limits of fair dealing. The publisher or other rights-holder may allow further reproduction and re-use of this version - refer to the White Rose Research Online record for this item. Where records identify the publisher as the copyright holder, users can verify any specific terms of use on the publisher’s website. Takedown If you consider content in White Rose Research Online to be in breach of UK law, please notify us by emailing [email protected] including the URL of the record and the reason for the withdrawal request. [email protected] https://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/ 1 After Dark: Channel 4’s innovation in television talk Abstract This paper explores the significance of the late night British discussion programme After Dark (Channel 4, 1987-1997) in terms of the production contexts of the time and its distinctive form and structure as television. After Dark emerged during a period of significant transition in the political economy of British broadcasting, with a major factors being the creation of Channel 4. As part of its extension of the possibilities of television as a cultural form, Channel 4 attempted to break the prevailing temporal frame of television output and this was most evident in the open-ended nature of After Dark’s transmission, with the programme running into the early hours of the morning with no fixed end-point. Critical attention to it serves among other things to place in sharper perspective the variety of alignments possible between the discourses television produces and those in play more broadly across the different spaces of the political and social. In particular, it highlights the distinctive forms of speech and deliberation (and therefore the distinctive modes of viewing and listening) informing the programme’s design. Keywords: talk television; Channel 4; television production; innovation; political debate In this article, we explore the late night British discussion programme After Dark (Channel 4, 1987-1997) in terms both of the production contexts of the time and of its distinctive form and structure as television. The setting into which After Dark emerged was a period of significant transition in the political economy of British broadcasting, with major factors being the creation and emergence of Channel 4, the development (largely on C4) of new and innovative forms of factual programming, and the early signs of the importing of television formats from non-domestic territories (Harvey, 1994; Born, 2003; Sparks, 1995). In terms of the form and structure of the programme, After Dark is indicative in part of wider cultural and ideological shifts in broadcasting towards increased representations of ‘everyday’ non- elite contributors and engagement with ‘sensitive’ themes. It also shows that exploration of the further possibilities of television as a cultural form which Channel 4, in particular, was seen to champion. There was a determined focus to break the traditional temporal frame of television output and in the case of After Dark this was most evident in the open-ended nature 2 of transmission, with the programme running into the early hours of the morning with no fixed end-point. The main analytic interest of After Dark lies neither in its development of approaches from earlier British broadcasting (although precursors are apparent) nor in any direct influence on what came later. It lies, rather, in its exploiting for a few years the possibilities of a particular phase in British television’s economy and culture to create a programme of high originality, not least in the political and social relations of the kinds of speech it generated. It is important to note that although we wish to place After Dark in its production context and in the larger setting of the television industry at the time, in this article we place considerable emphasis on how the programme looked and sounded. We do this especially, in relation to its distinctive use of talk, by developing a scheme of analysis with examples. So this is a case-study in media form as much as it is a study in television production history. After Dark and Channel 4: the context of indie innovation After Dark first aired on British television in 1987 on Channel 4, and subsequently ran on the channel until 1997 although from 1991 it ceased to be a regular slot and appeared in the form of an occasional ‘special’, a transition which some commentators regarded as the effective ‘death’ of the original idea.1 Channel 4, which began broadcasting in 1982, is widely credited with revitalising British factual television in the 1980s, with the creation of a range of series including the often controversial current affairs series ‘Dispatches’, ‘Diverse Reports’ and ‘The Friday Alternative’, alongside an extended news programme (Channel 4 News, 1982 - ). As Georgina Born has argued, the focus was on ‘aesthetic and political invention’ during the 1980s, and on challenging the ‘prevailing norms of British television’ (2003: 778). After Dark can certainly be seen within this innovative, risk-taking tradition. Mark Duguid notes of it: One of the most successful innovations was also the simplest: a late-night, open- ended discussion programme treating a single topic in detail, with no filmed reports, aggressive interviewers, studio audience, political soundbites, computer graphics or video effects. (Duguid, n.d.). 1 The show was dropped by the then Channel 4 Chief Executive, Michael Grade, in 1991, leading to a campaign for its reinstatement by a range of public figures, with this programme of occasional specials seen as the Ws, 2003). 3 The idea for the weekly series (transmitted on Friday nights beginning at 11 pm) was pitched by Sebastian Cody, a producer with a background in talk show production at the BBC, to Jeremy Isaacs (now Sir Jeremy Isaacs), the first Chief Executive of Channel 4 from 1982-1988. Cody had worked on the chat show Parkinson (BBC, 1971-82), which dominated the talk show landscape at the time, alongside the political talk show Question Time, the ‘twin pillars’ of prevailing talk broadcasting (Cody, 2015). After Dark was based on the principle of broadcasting live, and letting the guests decide when the conversation was finished, a combination which, according to Cody, ‘produced, as if by magic, chatty grenades, exploding first in central Europe and then the UK, disturbing the smooth efficiency of the schedules and the peace of mind of the broadcasters with happy regularity’ (Cody, 2008, no pagination). The format for After Dark was derived from the Austrian discussion programme Club 2, which had run with significant success on Austrian television since 1976.1 Cody acquired the rights to this show for his production company Open Media, and then convinced Channel 4 to commission the programme on a trial basis. By all accounts, Cody found a highly receptive buyer for his idea in Jeremy Isaacs, as among other things, it involved broadcasting into the early hours of the morning under the newly commissioned Channel 4 Nighttime scheduling slot, introduced as competition to the ITV companies provision of late night content (Isaacs, 2015). After Dark, following the Club 2 model, had several features which marked it out from other talk-based discussion programmes of the time. Most notably, as indicated above, there was no set running time for an edition (The Nightime strand ran until around 3am three days a week). Instead, the approach to the programme’s length was made clear at the start of the first ever edition of After Dark by the show’s host Anthony Wilson, when he said ‘essentially we will run until the discussion reaches a natural conclusion’. Other strongly original factors included a non-confrontational host (chairing the conversation in a manner more akin to a seminar discussion), and a mixture of social elites (largely drawn from politics, aristocracy, academia and industry) and unknown ‘ordinary’ people, albeit people often with extraordinary experiences to recount. The programme prided itself on its ability to get contributions from types of individuals who did not normally appear on mainstream television and who were socially positioned outside of the radar of mainstream journalism. Its format encouraged dissent and openness, as Helena Kennedy (the host for the second series) has written: 4 I was attracted to the format because it offered guests an opportunity for frank discussion, freed from the need for soundbites, and from the need to cut off the flow of frank talk midstream. The programme was liberating for participants, and I liked that the host was really a facilitator and not an interviewer. (Kennedy, 2003) At the heart of After Dark’s ‘contract’ with the viewer was its liveness. It was broadcast live with no delay, although Channel 4 had the ability to cut to a commercial break or mute the sound if it was felt that something legally controversial was being broadcast.